About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
MSNBC 9
MSNBCW 9
CSPAN 7
KQED (PBS) 4
WETA 4
WHUT (Howard University Television) 4
WMPT (PBS) 4
CSPAN2 2
KRCB (PBS) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 53
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 53 (some duplicates have been removed)
worked for ronald reagan. what you want, you should tax. what you don't want as a society, what you don't want is a society, rather, you should tax and what you do want you should subsidize. my god, if there's anything we should be subsidizing, it's medical devices and research and medicine and science. and here is the administration coming with a 2.3% tax on companies, many of which are not profitable. shannon: yeah. and that's just one of many, many taxes tucked into the bill, but, of course, more than 3,000 pages and most members of congress admitted they didn't read it. it's good to see you, thank you so much for weighing in. >>> the resignation of the nation's spy chief has the pentagon releasing its version of events of the terror attacks in libya that left four americans dead. we're going to show you that timeline. and what looks like a joke is growing bigger. [ male announcer ] when was the last time something made your jaw drop? campbell's has 24 new soups that will make it drop over, and over again. ♪ from jammin' jerk chicken, to creamy gouda bisque. see what's new from cam
if ronald reagan sent troops to the middle east and hundreds were killed and reagan just cut and ran? >> caller: oh, absolutely. >> john: chris thank you for the call. benghazi is not going to go away, and that's why i'm so thankful for media outlets for -- well like what you have right here peter. >> we do what we can. >> john: we're taking your calls at 866-55-press, we'll be right back, talking about the the -- horror that is the american music awards and much more. >> announcer: this is the "bill press show." >>tax cuts don't create jobs. the golden years as the conservatives call them, we had the highest tax rates, and the highest amount of growth, and the highest amount of jobs. those are facts. >>"if you ever raise taxes on the rich, you're going to destroy our economy." not true! ♪ >> announcer: chatting with you live at current.com/billpress. this is the "bill press show." >> john: this is the "bill press show." i am not bill press, i'm john fugelsang. happy to be filling in with peter and dan and the whole crew. what are the comments. >> we're tweeting @bpshow
should perhaps stop using the word "mandates." it wasn't terribly long ago that ronald reagan won 49 states. that's a mandate. it's unthinkable that any candidate can win anywhere close to that. obama won a pretty impressive victory even without a serious third party candidate, he did not get 51% of the popular vote. he won 26 states to romney's 24 states. we'll see time after time very, very close elections. we need to rethink the negotiations of mandates and say this person won the presidency. they need to go forward with that agenda. >> what about the republicans? are they going to do a big rethink here? >> yes, and more than one. it was interesting that the republican governors happened to be meeting this week in las vegas when this news about the interesting comments that romney made to his donors that we just saw and the republican governors, bobby jindal of louisiana did not miss five seconds before they really denounced what romney was saying. the republicans have a lot of things to think about, not of which is their growing problem with hispanic voters. that is the big growi
of value for what i pay. >> bill: they say we're doing this in the legacy of ronald reagan. bull you know what. ronald reagan raised taxes five times. >> reagan would have no place in the current republican party given some of the things they did. grover norquist holds him up as an icon. grover is in a completely different place than he is on taxes. >> bill: why don't the media expose these people as the liars and hypocrites that they are? >> because they're fair and balanced. >> bill: so are we going over the fiscal cliff? >> i think we are. i think we are. for a couple of reasons. one, there's not a whole lot of time. it is six weeks from tomorrow to the start -- >> bill: they don't have any backbone. >> that's number two. number three 80 lame ducks who may not show up to vote. plus you've got this stale -- continuing stalemate on tax and spending policies and then on top of everything else, it is not really a fiscal cliff. it is a fiscal slope. it stays in place. they called it a cliff but the damage to
conference after being re-elected to a second term as president, then president ronald reagan was asked if he had anything to say to the people in the country who did not vote for him and who did not feel that they were part of the reagan revolution. he was also asked about nancy reagan falling down and bumping her head right before the election. he said that she had a tender lump on the side of her head, but that she would be fine. in president clinton's first press conference, after he was re-elected to a second term, the president started to answer a question about the role of first lady hillary clinton in the second clinton term, before he sort of diverted himself into talking about just how damned tired he was. >> well, let me answer the question about hillary. i think what first lady will do is something that i think it will be consistent with what she's been doing, but we have not, frankly, we've been too tired to talk about it. yesterday, i'm embarrassed to tell the american people, i actually slept past noon. i was tired. >> there's no shame in that. >> in the first press conference
should be granted a dozen to 14 years for raising my family. >> you talked about the diversity. >> ronald reagan said, i will not hold your youth and inexperience against you. >> i will pass that onto luke. >> you are talking about the diversity about the democratic caucus in which you lead in the house. it is a new thing at least that there is not a straight, white male majority in this caucus. and i wonder, you know, the republican party, won a larger majority of the white vote which they were bragging about today in terms of what went right for them in this election which they lost. they lost all minority groups by large margins. when you look at your group and you have that momentous change, what do you say to people who look at that change and think i'm not sure i'm happy about the fact that there is a -- in the democratic caucus? >> i haven't met anybody like that yet. >> but let's say i would say everybody is talking about how we can appeal to these people to vote for us and we are saying no, we want to go beyond that. we want them to represent us. so it is not about we need your v
's daughter, understood conservatism or ronald reagan, the alcoholic son that grew up in middle america who actually believed, like i believe, like a lot of conservatives believe that if you want to help everybody, if you want to help the 100%, what you want to do is you want to fight hard for their individual free am do doms and unshackle them from regulations from high taxes, from a centralized state, and that's the best way to move forward. we can have a debate over whether that's right or wrong. the problem is, we didn't have that debate this time because mitt romney's view was such an insulated view of a guy who grew up rich and grew up in this insular world where his father ran car companies and was governor of michigan. >> this is a pivot point for the republican party. i think bobby jindal probably said it best. you have to turn -- you have to marry conservatism and pop y lyh populism. we helped the little guy because that's the america dream. it's not the opposite as far as entitlements and victims. that's a pivot point. and the republicans that get it are going to be part of a new
to ronald reagan. what did we do? we nominated michael dukakis who is a fine man but a liberal from massachusetts. it took three beatings for to us realize you have to make common cause of moderates. that is the internal struggle the republican have to go through. true to principle on fiscal issues but if they embrace the far right social agenda it drives off the young people and alienate single women and suburban women and you see it in the numbers. >> senator, in your state of indiana -- >> can i say one last thing? if i could just get -- if i could say one last thing. please continue to nominate people for public office talking about women being rap rapeed. >> won by only five points such a bad year. republicans should not kid themselves. republican lost 25 of 33 senate seats. republicans gained back the seats easy to gain back when no other new state at the presidential level. obama had a tough economy, glow gone from the first term, and all of that. republicans lost the national household by half a million votes. they held the house to redistricting and the democratic voters ar
. democrats had lost two elections in a row to ronald reagan. and what did we do? nominated michael dukakis, a fine man but a liberal from massachusetts and the internal struggle republicans will go through, they have to be true to their principles, particularly on economic and fiscal issues but when they embrace the far right social agenda it drives off young people and it does alienate single women and suburban women... >> senator, i mean, your state -- >> what i'm saying -- >> republican governor. >> chris: wait, wait, wait. >> one last thing, please continue to nominate people for public office who talk about women being raped and that being god's will. >>... actually a great -- won by only five points, and republicans should not kid themselves, they lost 25 to 33 senate seats and republicans gained back the two states easy to gain back and no other new state at the presidential level and obama had a tough economy and, the glow was gone from the first temrm and republicans los the national house, and redistricting and democratic voters are more concentrated in more districts, it was a b
cracking around ronald reagan's feet, the first time he raised taxes. i remember when he said that. >> yes, exactly. well, i think the speaker, i think, is setting the tone, as you saw on the front page, above the fold in "the washington post," you know. call his caucus to task, saying he's got to get the nation's business done. and i think what he said implicitly and probably directly behind the door is, trust me on this. you know, i get it. i understand what we need to do. we're not going to sacrifice our principles and values, but we've got to get the nation's business done. and then when we have a bill kristol coming out and saying, you know, they're all rich guys who live out in hollywood. we can raise their taxes. what an 180-degree turn. >> they're not the small business men. >> you'll probably note this, what an election will do. winning and losing has a consequence. and i think for a lot of republicans right now, given where we were two years ago versus where we are right now, you realize, hey, we're going to have to deal. we're going to have to deal. >> what about the president?
former california governor ronald reagan announced his third bid for the presidency and for the republican nomination and, of course, that one was successful. >>> the scandal continues to grow around david tpetraeus as his successor general john allen is now linked to the controversy or at least linked to some of the players. let's bring in our panel, political director for the grio.com, and columnist with bloomberg view, and stephanie is the president of emily's list and i also have james from the national journal who is out with a brand-new piece on this entire episode. so, james, i want to start with you because i thought this was a very striking -- you sort of write about -- trying to write about this from 30,000 feet, the impact on national security. this is what you write, no one is condoning what petraeus did, but there are a lot of self-righteous people holding him to a standard that not many people could meet without considering what he sacrificed because of the years of separation from his spouse and family, said one army general. there's a lack of proporti
was it, 1982 or 1983, back in the 1980's, tip o'neill and ronald reagan got together and made adjustments to social security that saved the program. that's my point. sometimes you need to adjust and change to save the very thing you care most about. and so tip o'neill didn't sell out the democratic party by embracing that agreement. the democrats in congress, many of them very progressive at that time who supported it, didn't work traders to the party. if we do it in a responsible way, a balanced and doesn't just gut the programs and just not all entitlement reform with no revenue, i think the base of the party and leaders and organized labor will understand. they also know the alternative is doing nothing, with bad damage to jobs and the economy. and ultimately insolvency of these programs themselves, or. b, the right wing of the republicans are coming in and taking over because we have done nothing to solve the problem and their answer to the solution would be much more draconian. host: jack. he's our first phone call for the senator. republican. go ahead. caller: mr. bayh, one question
second-term presidenciy are very, very difficult. i thought ronald reagan had a fairly successful second term and bill clinton's was marred by his own personal issues. second trerms difficult. w. had a dficult time. one of the things i think they underestimate at the white house and the treasury is the idea of doing tax reform. when you both were probably in preschool, i was covering the '85, '86, tax reform act, and to call it heavy lifting is an understatement. it took a savvy, smart treasury secretary, jim baker, working with capitol hill and a supportive president, and democrats and republicans. i don't see any of those ingredients today to do tax reform in 2013, 2014. >> especially ifhe esident going to have a new treasury secretary. itim geithner, this has sort of been his-- tim geithner wanted to be behind tax reform, wanted to be the force behind corporate tax reform. that might speak to tim geithner staying on a little long fer they think they can get something done in the first six months. >> why is anything different now? why is anything different in the second term? >> good p
countries have transformed, reform, lower the rates. we haven't touched it since ronald reagan in 1986. bill clinton did raise it at one point but we haven't done anything to touch the rate and reform -- tecum from 16.5% to 15% which most of you are aware of because you do business there, and this capital investment is going to follow countries that have a more competitive environment in taxes is one of them's a we have to reform the tax code and when you do that you will get more revenue. it's guaranteed. again, as i was talking at earlier there are opportunities here for us as a country and if you look at the congressional budget analysts this and go to the tax committee analysis what tax reform could mean in the economic growth and all of them will lead to more growth with this corporate tax reform. estimate of the president says what he did last friday, this was fought over in the campaign and we fought over rising tax rates. jay carney said they would veto any bill that extends the current tax rate so if he insists that tax rates go out for those making over to under $50,000 will would
. there is that incentive as well. you have to look at ronald reagan as well as henry kissinger, when they went into negotiations, said you have to come willing to truly cut a deal. you may get 90%. >> takes both sides. obama is very good in liberal rhetoric blaming republicans. even in "l.a. times", obama wants to help the middle class but republicans don't want to give everything to the rich which is not true. and a lot of liberals are saying this was a mandate to raise taxes? i think people can be pro-choice, pro-day marriage and have fiscal responsibility and live within their means. jon: well, i mean to be honest, angela, the president campaigned on a platform saying i'm going to go back to the bill clinton tax rates and the wealthiest are going to have to pay more money and he won. >> but bill clinton worked with a republican congress and our economy was not in dire straits that it is right now. so if he really wants to go back to the bill clinton days he should go to the table and work with republicans. >> also you have to look taxes were historical high. one of the things they're talkin
that divided government sometimes has done very important things for the country. think of ronald reagan and tip o'neill reforming social security. ronald reagan and tip o'neill doing the last comprehensive tax reform. bill clinton and republican congress doing welfare reform and balancing the budget. we look forward to making this divided government productive for the american people. and we have, of course, as everyone well knows, a lot of challenges here at the end of the year. i'll be meeting with the president and the other leadership on friday to talk about the way forward. and we look forward to being a part of the solution to these significant problems. it's my plesh shoe now to turn to our newly elected whip, senator john cornyn of texas. >> thanks, mitch. it's an honor to be elected by my colleagues to serve as the whip. the assistant leader on the republican side. as leader mcconnell said, we have a lot of very difficult work to do, but we are committed to working with our colleagues across the aisle to solving the nation's urgent problems. we know what those are in the lame d
the center. as an independent, i can give advice to both parties. >> ronald reagan and jack kemp -- the party of upward mobility, that didn't seem to be the republican party this year. now, maybe it was because of this very effective attack campaign against mitt romney and bain capital and 47% of all that stuff. but i think hispanics and asians -- and a lot of women, they didn't vote for the republican party not just if you are hispanic because you think their anti-immigrant, but because it doesn't seem like the kind of party that will create a country in which you are were going to have a chance to rise. it seems, by their own statement and also by the definition the democrats gave them, is a more exclusive thing. if republicans don't change that, their future is not good enough let me just say that it he would've been allowed to be out there a little bit more -- he was a jack kemp disciple. i think it's remarkable that we could reelect an african-american president with the name of barack obama at a time when you had almost 9% unemployment in the country was suffering economically. no that
of the money here, but to be the big problems have been the trade agreements, starting with ronald reagan, the outsourcing of our jobs. there are a lot of people trying to live and $10 an hour while they are getting social security, medicare, taking out of their money, and then they are told by people like paul ryan and mitt romney that that is an entitlement. to me, that is like more of a ponzi scheme if they take that away. getting back to the elephant in the room, until we start talking about structurally change in this country beyond fighting over taxes -- you can fight over moving around the chairs on the titanic, but what really needs to be done is we need to repeal the trade agreement, look at taxing goods from china, and we need to get jobs back into this country, manufacturing jobs with wages people can live on and pressure for wages to go up. right now, the pressure is for wages to go down. you are fighting over what is less of the money coming in. host: let's go to the congressman. guest: this is an important issue that was fought over in the campaign. we need to support manufa
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 53 (some duplicates have been removed)